About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)
out saying oh, barack obama, he bought votes, i would have won the election if he wouldn't have bought the votes. that's the logo of a guy who just makes excuses. >> so between the change of heart and all the interviews he's doing and the aspiring acting career, some people are saying that it's possible, just possible, that eric is doing all of this just to get attention. >> they couldn't be more correct. of course. who gets a tattoo on their face and isn't looking for attention? >> very thought provoking although perhaps not universally true. like maybe if somebody got a tattoo on their face that said i'm shy. in any event, if it was attention he was looking for, he definitely got it although the romney tattoo will soon fade into nothing but a cheeky memory, eric's place on the "ridiculist," that i promise you, is permanent. that does it for us. see you again one hour from now. erin burnett's "outfront" starts now. >>> 28 days away, what does it take for a deal? and the use of chemical weapons will bring an immediate reaction from the community. our panel, we'll ask them if the
that say we're putting revenue on the table, the american people did that when they elected, you know, the president and a democratic senate again. again, they have to agree to a deal or tax rates on everybody go up. i think we should do everything we can to avoid that for as many people as we possibly can. >> so far, four house gop members, as we said, john boehner has booted them from key committees for going against leadership. you're obviously the deputy whip. you are part of leadership. you have challenged john boehner. i mean, what you put out there, it may sound -- may sound very normal and calm and compromise-filled to many. but perhaps to him, it's a little bit of a slap in the face. have you talked to him about it directly? >> yeah, of course. i mean, look, i deal with the speaker on a regular basis. and he knows, look, i'm never going to undercut him and he knows when the tough votes come, and they're going to come, that i'll be there to try and support him and help him. so he's not going to scold me because i offered in private, you know, my advice that was solicited and t
the establishment. fed up after the republican party's loss in the election. some members of the gop are pushing former congressman j.c. watts to run for chairman. but a lot of people in the party don't seem too hot on the idea. a leader tells our peter hamby he had no prayer. roland martin warns that responses like that could backfire. he writes even if they choose not to vote for watts, if he decides to even seek the job, it is his skin color and perspective. that is strl to the central to the gop having any sort of presidential future. "out front" tonight, c.j. watts. let me ask you point blank, what do you think about what roland martin had to say, what the party has to respond to you even considering running, thinking about race? >> well, erin, i don't necessarily believe that the answer is to take a black face and put him in the chairmanship at the rnc or female or hispanic or asian ornatetive americ nati. i think it's bigger than that. i think we have to surround ourselves, at the rnc and throughout the party, we have to understand diversity. diversity is not a bad word. i take a biblical
. susan rice's appalling words when she put election politics ahead of stopping the again side in rwanda. before that tweet was deleted. a 2002 article claims rice said this. if we use the word again side and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the november congressional election? our foreign affairs reporter is out front tonight. elise, does the criticism against rice add up, do you think? >> i don't think 100%, soledad. susan rice was director for u.n. affairs at the national security council at the time of the again side, the rwanda again side. that office dealt more with the united nations than with africa, even though the united nations was dealing with the issue. at the time it was a working level staff position. her first in government, ambassador rice could make announcements at that level, but wouldn't be involved making an important decision getting involved militarily in rwanda. president clinton said he made the decision, it was the greatest mistake of his presidency, and ambassador rice travelled to rwanda after the again side. she said seeing the ground li
. rick warren tweeted this. susan rice's appalling words when she put election politics ahead of stopping the genocide in rwanda. before that tweet was delete ed -- a 2002 article that claims she said this. if we use the word genocide and are seen as doing nothing, what will be the effect on the november election? elyse, does the criticism against rice add up do you think? >> i don't think 100%. susan rice was director for u.n. affairs at the national security counsel at the time of the genocide. the rwanda genocide. now, that office dealt more with the united nations than with africa, even though the united nations was dealing with the issue. at the time, it was a working level staff position. her first in government. ambassador rice could make announcements, but wouldn't be involved in making such an important decision about getting involved militarily in rwanda and president clinton said he made the decision. it was the greatest mistake of his presidency. and susan rice traveled to rwanda shortly after the genocide and said seeing the horrors of rwanda, the ground littered with hundred
by the fiscal future. he could be concerned about every citizen in the state that he was elected to serve. his job -- those are his constituents and that's his job. >> look, i see where you come from. we have to think about this in a broader sense. if every state is looking out for itself, there's going to free ride. they're going to engage in policies that damage everyone's well-being over the long term by looking out for their own re-election prospects. these guys are being political rather than looking out for the long-term interests of their citizens, their states and also the country as a whole. rather than sub sid dies development in really dangerous areas. that's called moral hazard, and that's something that's really bringing the country to its knees economically. >> last i checked, you look out for yourself. you might say that's not a great idea, if you're in new york -- actually, no, if you're in new york you're concerned about new york and not about california. you focus on where you are. that's a reality. >> all right. thanks very much to both of us. please let us know what you thi
was elected to serve. his job, those are his constituents. that's his job. >> well, look. i see where you're coming from but we have to think about this in a broader sense. okay? if every state is looking out only for itself, what they're going to do is free ride. they're going to engage in policies that damage everyone's wellbeing over the long term looking out for their own re-election prospects. >> wait, wait. >> they're really political rather than looking out for the long-term interests of the citizens, their states and also the country as a whole. >> last i checked -- >> beforehand rather than subsidize development and dangerous areas and that's moral hazard and that's something that's bringing the country to the knees economically. >> last i checked you look out for yourself. >> that's public servants are supposed to do, roland. >> no. in new york, you are concerned about new york and not california. you focus on where you are. that's the reality. >> all right. we are going to hit pause there. please let us know what you think about that conversation on twitter and facebook page. >
Search Results 0 to 15 of about 16 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)